Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted] , and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: The response from the business is not correct nor is it accurateWhen I booked the room on August *, [redacted] listed the hotel as pet friendlyEven today, Aug **, 2014, the hotel still comes up as pet friendlyMy search string: In [redacted] , I searched for "pet friendly hotels Long Island NY." A link for pet-friendly hotels in [redacted] comes up I clicked the link and a list of hotels in [redacted] 's pet-friendly list of hotels comes up [redacted] at [redacted] is listed I clicked the link for [redacted] at [redacted] and the hotel information and room offerings comes up The page does not state the hotel is not pet friendly, and it does not mention an outrageous fee of over $ These are the steps I followed Aug *, and these are the steps I just followed today, Aug **The same result comes upThe hotel is included in [redacted] 's list of pet-friendly hotels and there is no statement about its no-pet policy nor any information about its feePlease see attached files documenting my search results As such, I reject the business's response and I want the fee reimbursed in full In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above Sincerely, [redacted]
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted] , and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: The business is not understanding the core issue here: there is a distinction between (1) booking directly through [redacted] and (2) first conducting a [redacted] search for pet-friendly hotelsI conducted a [redacted] search for pet friendly hotels on Long Island, which still, to this day, results in the [redacted] listing of the hotel as pet-friendlyThe hotel is responsible for all avenues of its marketing and advertisingTo this day, it is still possible, as it happened to me, to book a room online being fully assured that the hotel is pet friendlyThe hotel must take responsibility for that factIf a customer goes directly through [redacted] , the hotel is not listed as pet friendlyBut, if a customer first does a [redacted] search for pet-friendly hotels on Long Island, as I did, the hotel is in fact included in a list of pet-friendly hotels in [redacted] It is the hotel's responsibility to correct that marketing issue, and the customer should never be unreasonably penalized for following a legitimate online search and booking processMoreover, the fee is unreasonableIt does not take $to clean a room after a pet has visitedThe hotel did not spend $to clean the room after we leftThis fee is inordinately punitive and unjustI am still requesting a full refund of this unreasonable fee [redacted] In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above Sincerely, [redacted]
Firstly, we apologize for your frustrationWhen you checked in you did sign a registration form (attached) that clearly states our pet policy and applicable fee when the policy is violatedWe, as a gesture of good faith, did refund half of the fee in the amount of $and feel that that is more than fair considering the extensive cleaning we have to do to the carpeting and room in order to protect the health of the next occupant In regards to [redacted] , we are not trying to use them as an excuseRather to address your advertising concerns and the fact is that [redacted] clearly states that we only except service dogs Again, we apologize if you feel "victimized" or "unfairly targeted" , but we as a bushiness have to make ensure that clean standard are meet to the industry and guest expectations
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted] , and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: The response from the business is not correct nor is it accurateWhen I booked the room on August *, [redacted] listed the hotel as pet friendlyEven today, Aug **, 2014, the hotel still comes up as pet friendlyMy search string: In [redacted] , I searched for "pet friendly hotels Long Island NY." A link for pet-friendly hotels in [redacted] comes up I clicked the link and a list of hotels in [redacted] 's pet-friendly list of hotels comes up [redacted] at [redacted] is listed I clicked the link for [redacted] at [redacted] and the hotel information and room offerings comes up The page does not state the hotel is not pet friendly, and it does not mention an outrageous fee of over $ These are the steps I followed Aug *, and these are the steps I just followed today, Aug **The same result comes upThe hotel is included in [redacted] 's list of pet-friendly hotels and there is no statement about its no-pet policy nor any information about its feePlease see attached files documenting my search results As such, I reject the business's response and I want the fee reimbursed in full In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above Sincerely, [redacted]
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted] , and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: The business is not understanding the core issue here: there is a distinction between (1) booking directly through [redacted] and (2) first conducting a [redacted] search for pet-friendly hotelsI conducted a [redacted] search for pet friendly hotels on Long Island, which still, to this day, results in the [redacted] listing of the hotel as pet-friendlyThe hotel is responsible for all avenues of its marketing and advertisingTo this day, it is still possible, as it happened to me, to book a room online being fully assured that the hotel is pet friendlyThe hotel must take responsibility for that factIf a customer goes directly through [redacted] , the hotel is not listed as pet friendlyBut, if a customer first does a [redacted] search for pet-friendly hotels on Long Island, as I did, the hotel is in fact included in a list of pet-friendly hotels in [redacted] It is the hotel's responsibility to correct that marketing issue, and the customer should never be unreasonably penalized for following a legitimate online search and booking processMoreover, the fee is unreasonableIt does not take $to clean a room after a pet has visitedThe hotel did not spend $to clean the room after we leftThis fee is inordinately punitive and unjustI am still requesting a full refund of this unreasonable fee [redacted] In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above Sincerely, [redacted]
Firstly, we apologize for your frustrationWhen you checked in you did sign a registration form (attached) that clearly states our pet policy and applicable fee when the policy is violatedWe, as a gesture of good faith, did refund half of the fee in the amount of $and feel that that is more than fair considering the extensive cleaning we have to do to the carpeting and room in order to protect the health of the next occupant In regards to [redacted] , we are not trying to use them as an excuseRather to address your advertising concerns and the fact is that [redacted] clearly states that we only except service dogs Again, we apologize if you feel "victimized" or "unfairly targeted" , but we as a bushiness have to make ensure that clean standard are meet to the industry and guest expectations